Social Workers as “Experts” in the Family Court System: Is Evidence-Based Practice a Missing Link or Host-Created Knowledge?

Abstract

The graduate school curriculum for social workers requires that students learn to critically distinguish between opinion-based knowledge and evidence-based practices, or empirically-supported interventions. Once graduated, licensed social workers are often called upon to offer diagnostic and predictive opinions as experts in a variety of macro-environments. When the family courts are that “host” environment, social workers proffer expert opinions that may categorize and label parents or children for purposes of a judge's allocation of physical or legal custody. In this article, it is suggested that the social work profession, within all three domains of education, practice, and research, should more precisely link the design and fidelity of an evidence-based practice (EBP) with its potential misapplication or warping when proffered as science in “host” environments like family courts. As Foucault and other scholars warn, the failure to verify that an intervention is applied correctly may actually enhance the risk of social injustice by interpreting and translating EBP knowledge in the non-empirical form of authority-by-license. This article, therefore, proposes that the social work profession, from the classroom to the field, has an obligation to thoroughly understand and engage interdisciplinary practices that assure respect for the strengths and limits of social work knowledge.

Keywords:

• Social work
• child custody
• evidence-based practices
• family courts
• social constructionism